Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and committee members, for the invitation to speak to you today on this very important topic.
I am the president of the Canadian Shipowners Association, and I'm joined today by Ms. Debbie Murray, who is our director of policy and regulatory affairs.
We're here today to talk to you primarily about safety management systems already employed by our members as well as about industry safety, and to answer questions you may have. We want to convey the message that the marine mode has a strong and more than sufficient safety regulatory regime with a track record to show it. We would propose that the system is ready to handle Canadian economic growth and commodity movement in a safe and reliable fashion. We want to ensure that any future regulations or legislation are proportionate to the risk, are not excessively burdensome, and are levied equitably against all modes of transportation.
Our member companies own Canadian ships. They are larger ships, generally over 20,000 tonnes. They employ only Canadian mariners, and they pay Canadian taxes. They operate in the very unique and demanding Canadian waterways of the Great Lakes, the Saint Lawrence River, the east coast of Canada, and the Canadian Arctic. They operate 86 vessels and last year carried over 50 million tonnes of bulk cargo, including petrochemicals, iron ore, coal, grain, aggregate, and general cargo. Our membership conducts what is called short-sea shipping in Canada and North America.
If I can leave you with any message today—and I don't want to bore you with too many acronyms—it's that we support safety management systems, and we've been using them for over a decade. It's a prerequisite for being a member of CSA that you have one or that you are moving towards having one.
Obviously, safety and protection of the marine environment are our first priorities for our membership, and that shows. Our customers expect it and demand it. It's good business to be safe. Data shows that marine safety has improved, and our track record is good and defendable, especially over the last decade.
Transport Canada data shows that there were no reported in-transit dangerous goods marine-related incidents between 2006 and 2011. In terms of collision-related injuries and fatalities per tonne kilometre, our mode had the lowest number of both from 2002 to 2011.
Most of the cargoes carried by our membership would not be classified as dangerous goods according to the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code. However, we do carry some petrochemicals. Given the potential for future growth in this sector, it is in my membership's interest to ensure that this committee and other decision-makers are aware of the current regime and practices of my membership and the effectiveness of these.
Our membership is confident that the current safety regimes and voluntary safety management systems are appropriate to the risk presented. We do not believe, given the track record, that increased regulation or stringency is required. We think we're doing a good job and we continually review our practices.
Canadian flag vessels are governed by the domestic regulatory regime administered through Transport Canada, which is shaped by and incorporates 33 protocols and conventions from the International Maritime Organization. This very extensive safety regulatory framework covers everything from vessel construction to the training of highly qualified personnel. Our members are also required to develop emergency procedures and agreements with certified response organizations, to be responsible for our acts at all levels of management, and to have the required liability insurance coverage and access to national and international compensation funds.
All seafarers must have certificates or licences as well as general seamanship, and they must undergo regular medical exams. Transport Canada sets these standards for minimum crewing, and our vessels adhere to these standards or go beyond them. It is also important to note the close relationship between shipowners, Transport Canada, the class societies, the Canadian Coast Guard, the St. Lawrence Seaway Corporation, and ports. This is really part of our safety and marine safety culture, and the Canadian industry does it very well.
Finally, and, I would suggest perhaps most important in addition to this extensive safety system, are the people we employ. They are Canadian mariners who have been educated in Canadian colleges, and they develop a very keen knowledge of the currents and contours of our inland, coastal, and Arctic waterways. Some move from ship to shore and work in corporate offices, and some even work at Transport Canada and the Canadian Coast Guard.
Safety management systems augment our industry's aforementioned regulatory regime. The domestic commercial fleet was exempted from the implementation of SMS in 2002. Most of our domestic commercial fleet, as I mentioned, already has an SMS in place, and the remainder are working towards having one.
Transport Canada is in the process of revising these regulations to make SMS mandatory for domestic vessels, and we understand that the revised regulations may be gazetted as soon as 2015.
Our membership does not see their SMS as one of documents; they are living documents that are consistently improving, evolving, and developing, based on a rigorous audit schedule, both third-party and internal, and by keeping eyes on industry best practices as well as applying lessons learned from other modes of transport and land-based industries. These are living documents that our crews use every day.
I would not say that SMS has singularly been responsible for safety in the marine mode. Safety has been the result of previously described international and domestic legal and regulatory frameworks, industry innovation, training, and a culture of safety. Indeed, I would suggest that if anything were to enhance safety it would be the reduction of any duplication in red tape. I know the government is working towards that objective. Filling out forms multiple times, often with the same data, does not serve to reduce risk. This is something that we can all work towards improving.
We understand that the committee is considering what additional measures should be taken to further improve the adoption and integration of SMS in all transportation modes. Given that we compete primarily with other modes of transportation in the domestic and continental bulk and petrochemical market, we would argue that the adoption and integration of SMS and any other safety regime must be equitable and applied equally to all modes of transport. The burden of compliance reporting and the stringency levels must be fair and based on appropriate levels of risk. We would also advise that the committee recognize the highly evolved framework and safety culture currently in place and build upon it for further success.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak to you today.